|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Maria Eagle): There were 73 apparent self-inflicted deaths in prisons in England and Wales in the 12 months between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007.
Mark Pritchard: Does the Minister recognise that from Leeds to Lewes and from Cardiff to Chelmsford the number of prison suicides continues to rise? In 2007, there were 92 such deathsan increase of 37 per cent. When will the Government take action to ensure that our prisons are appropriately staffed and that there are enough suicide-watch cells available, so that we can reduce that increasing figure?
Maria Eagle: Of course I take careful note of the trends that develop over time in respect of that issue. The hon. Gentleman will know that random fluctuations occur, and that year-on-year figures are not the best way of following underlying trends, whereas three-yearly figures are. However, one suicide in prison is one too many. All the staff in the Prison Serviceeverybody working on the issueand I are doing our utmost to improve the capacity that we all have to defend and protect the people concerned, many of whom are extremely vulnerable, from the impulse to do themselves harm.
It should be remembered that good care and support from staff save many, many lives, but such instances are under-reported or unreported. Prison staff are at the front line in trying to make sure that we reduce the number of suicides and self-inflicted deaths in prison. They go a good job generally, but we deal with a difficult and vulnerable population, many of whom wish to do themselves harm. We must redouble our efforts, and that is my intention.
Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough) (Con): The Secretary of State for Justice famously said recently that he was not losing any sleep over the parlous state of overcrowding in the prison estate. It is in the most overcrowded prisons that the suicides tend to happen. There were 800 suicides between 1997 and 2007. While the Secretary of State was not losing his sleep, individual prisoners were losing their lives. Will the Minister please apply her mind to breaking the back of overcrowding? Although prisoners deserve to be in prison, they should not be placed in such circumstancesabout 75 per cent. of them have at least two mental illnessesthat they are driven to take their own lives or self-harm in huge numbers. It is no good this complacent Government displaying a complacent attitude while the criminal justice system is in the state that they have presided over.
I absolutely reject the charge that any complacency whatever is displayed by the Government or by Ministers in the Ministry of Justice in respect of prison suicide and self-harm. We are working extremely hard with the Prison Service staff and those in safer custody units across the prison estate to try to minimise
the impact of self-harm, suicide and self-inflicted deaths on individuals, many of whom are extremely vulnerable and go into prison with risk factors. It is a complex area. I do not believe that there is any direct evidence that overcrowding in itself leads to increased numbers of deaths, although clearly some aspects of overcrowding can lead to increased distress in individual circumstances. These are individual matters, but it is absolutely not the case, and I reject the suggestion, that the Government or the ministerial team are complacent about the matter.
The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): My principal responsibilities are to help to protect victims and the public, to secure a reduction in offending and reoffending, and to promote a rigorous democracy. I am delighted about the contribution that the agencies for which my Department is responsible have made towards a further significant reduction in crime, which was announced last Thursday. We are the first Government since the war to have secured a significant reduction in crime, rather than the continual increases in crime that took place under previous Administrations.
Mark Pritchard: With increasing public concern and frustration about the leniency of many custodial sentences handed down to those convicted of murder, does the Secretary of State believe the time is right to review the minimum tariff for conviction of murder, which currently stands at only 15 years and which, as we all know, is decreased by so-called good behaviour? Is it not time that life meant life?
Mr. Straw: I am always happy to receive representations about sentences, including those for the most terrible crimes. However, I point out to the hon. Gentleman that where a tariff is set, as there is for life sentences, there is no remission for good behaviour. The prisoner must serve the full period of that tariff15 years in the case that the hon. Gentleman quotes, and in many cases very much longerbefore he or she is eligible for any application for parole.
T2.  David Taylor (North-West Leicestershire) (Lab/Co-op): Freedom of information is central to increasing public confidence in the civil service, whose core values the Secretary of State described as impartiality, integrity, honesty and objectivity. Sadly, in recent FOI correspondence, Ministry of Justice officials confess that the Department for Constitutional Affairs failed during most of its brief life to keep or publish a central register of private hospitality received by senior civil servants. What is the Secretary of State doing to remedy that lamentable lapse?
As my hon. Friend knows, I took over a new Ministry last June and it has been all very good since then. I should also say to my hon. Friend that I want the maximum of information to be brought out, including about private entertainment by officials. Earlier, I had an endorsement from the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) for the fact that, in general, my Ministers
and I always seek to provide the maximum of information, whether in parliamentary answers or responses to freedom of information requests.
Nick Herbert (Arundel and South Downs) (Con): Next week marks the first anniversary of the Ministry of Justice. Yesterday, one independent report condemned a culture of complacency in the criminal justice system; another warned that our electoral system is at breaking point. Apart from releasing 25,000 prisoners early, what does the Secretary of State think his Ministry has achieved in the past year?
Mr. Straw: My Ministry has achieved a considerable amount in the past year, including a dramatic reduction in crime, as I mentioned just a few minutes agoif Conservative Members paid attention, such nugatory questions would not have to be put by their Front Benchers. There has been a one-third reduction in crime, including a one-third reduction in violent crime [Interruption.] I am asked what contribution we have made, and I have mentioned exactly that contribution, because we are responsible for about half the criminal justice system.
I am delighted to say that at long last the Leader of the Opposition has accepted, under questioning, that that reduction in crime, which he had been denying, has happened. He was asked in a BBC interview whether overall crime figures were falling and finally he said, Yesabsolutely, absolutely. On that occasion, if on no others, he was dead right.
Nick Herbert: Back in 2004, the Government said that they were sympathetic to individual voter registration. Yesterday, the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice), said that she was still considering the issue. The Government have waited four years, but we still have local elections this week under an electoral system that, as the Rowntree report said yesterday, is vulnerable to fraud. Will there be individual voter registration in time for the next general electionyes or no?
Mr. Straw: The hon. Gentleman knows that establishing individual registration and ensuring that it works effectively will go beyond 2010. That is the truth of it, and it would be the truth for any political party. In any case, as he knows, if the next election is fought in 2010, it will be based on registers that will be completed this October through to December.
As far as postal votes are concerned, I remind the hon. Gentleman that the decision to extend postal voting was made on an all-party basis in about 2000-01. I accept, as does my hon. Friend the Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice), who is in direct charge of the issue, that we have to tighten the system further. It has already been tightened, but it needs to be tightened further. However, that is not directly germane to the issue of individual registration. We need to deal with postal votingin my view, as soon as we canto introduce individual registration as well.
T5.  Mr. Gordon Marsden (Blackpool, South) (Lab):
Having campaigned strongly on the issue, I very much welcome the Governments initiatives for separate special areas for witnesses and victims at magistrates
courts, including my own in Blackpool. What feedback has the Secretary of State had on the impact of those initiatives, and what plans does the Ministry have to expand them?
Mr. Straw: In the past 10 years, there has been a quiet revolution in how victims and witnessesparticularly those for the prosecutionare treated within the criminal justice system. We are anxious to build on that experience and extend it. Becoming a witness in court, particularly if the person has also been a victim of the crime, is a frightening and sometimes terrifying experience. The more assistance that the victims and other witnesses for the prosecution are given all the way through the system, the betterto ensure that those guilty of the crimes are convicted.
T3.  Sir Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield) (Con): The Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice), has recently replied to a large number of questions that I have tabled on postal voting, and I am grateful to her for those full and detailed replies. However, does she not agree that it is no longer sensible for postal votes to be sent out only 11 days before polling day? Many of them do not get to the people abroad who wish to vote in time to be returned and counted in the election. Will the Under-Secretary consider lengthening the time allowed for the process and ensure that the postal votes are sent out more than 11 days in advance, so that postal voting abroad is meaningful?
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Bridget Prentice): I have indeed replied to the hon. Gentleman on this matter very recently but, although I have some sympathy for his concerns, I repeat that two important points need to be made. First, we have already extended the time from six to 11 days, because the administrators also felt that more time was needed. Secondly, after candidates have been nominated, the administrators need time to make sure that the nominations are valid and to order and produce the ballot papers. There is a balance that we have to get right. People living abroad who retain the right to vote in this country can opt to use a proxy vote if the postal vote is not suitable.
Dr. Nick Palmer (Broxtowe) (Lab): The Select Committee on which I have the honour to serve under the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) is currently looking at the costs and benefits of alternative forms of punishment. In view of the deterrent effect that the confiscation of criminal assets in connection with drug dealing has had, does the Secretary of State feel that it is time to consider charging the costs, or part of the costs, of imprisonment or other punishment to the criminal rather than to the taxpayer?
The Prison Act 1952 provides that the costs of running prisons have to be met from the public purse. If my hon. Friend were to think about the consequences of trying to charge prisoners for prison, he would see that they could be very difficult. Indeed, Charles Dickens made it clear that, even in the early 19th century, felons in criminal prisons did not have to pay the costs of their prison accommodationalthough, as it happens, debtors did. We want to ensure that
criminals pay for the crimes that they commit through compensation measures, and we also want compensation orders to be better enforced.
David Howarth (Cambridge) (LD): May I return to the report on Anthony Joseph, which my right hon. Friend the Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Mr. Beith) raised earlier? Does the Secretary of State agree with the reports conclusion that there was nothing to suggest that Joseph was suffering from a severe mental illness? After all, serious concerns had been raised about Josephs mental state since he was 15, and he had reported self-harm to the prison authoritiesitself a warning sign. Moreover, the fact that prisoners are 10 times more likely to suffer from severe mental illnesses than members of the general public means that simply being in the system is another warning sign. Does not the case show that there is an urgent need to ensure that resources are directed not to massive prison building programmes, but to mental health screening and treatment?
Mr. Straw: There was a failure in this case, and it is a matter of huge sorrow to everyone involved. There has been a thorough inspection of what happened, with the aim of ensuring, as far as is humanly possible, that such things do not happen again. The hon. Gentleman asks about mental health provision, but we do need to provide more prison places. One result of our getting on top of crime and criminality is that more people are prosecuted for serious offences and are being sentenced to jail for longer. That is fundamental if, having got crime down by a third in the past 10 years, we are to get it down even further. That said, however, we have greatly improved mental health provision in prison, and Lord Bradley is looking at how we can improve it further. We are also looking at more effective ways to improve mental health facilities outside prison.
T7.  Fiona Mactaggart (Slough) (Lab): Recently, The Times reported that the president of the family division had raised concerns with the Lord Chancellor about the reduction in the number of non-molestation orders taken out by women victims of domestic violence. At the same time, the number of reported domestic violence incidents has increased, and there has been a 23 per cent. increase in prosecutions and a significant rise in the number of convictions. Are women safer or less safe following the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004?
Bridget Prentice: My hon. Friend referred to the concerns of the president of the family division. I have met some of the judges in the family division to discuss these issues. We are trying to gather together some evidence from their experience and elsewhere to see whether this concern has to be urgently addressed. Since the introduction of the special domestic violence courts, we have a far higher success rate in convictions, with over 70 per cent. of convictions as a result of those courts.
The introduction of independent advisers has been hugely helpful in encouraging women to come forward to get protection and to take the case through the justice system. We are concerned about these issues and we are in discussions with the judiciary about them. However, following the Act and the work that this Government have done in trying to protect vulnerable
women from domestic violence, we should be grateful that this happening. We should not only monitor the concerns that are being outlined but ensure that more women come forward in order to stop this heinous crime.
T4.  Norman Baker (Lewes) (LD): Is the Secretary of State aware that over the past five years 1,723 documents have gone missing on their way from Government Departments to the national archives, and that those highly political files include some on the Stephen Lawrence inquiry, the Iranian embassy siege, and Cabinet Office documents relating to how the European Union perceives the United Kingdom? Will he place a list of those missing documents in the Library, press all Departments to find those missing documents, and report back to the House in due course?
Mr. Straw: I am now aware of the extent of these missing documents. I will certainly look into it. The hon. Gentleman will understand the quite intense difficulty sometimes of proving that something is missing until someone is looking for it, but I will do my best and inform the House.
T8.  Mr. David Kidney (Stafford) (Lab):
Given the potential for terribly tragic consequences when the
different parts of the criminal justice system fail to work together effectively, do Ministers agree that good, effective information and communication technologies are not merely desirable but essential; and do they accept that public procurement of such systems in the criminal justice system has not yet been good enough and needs to be better?
Mr. Straw: The answer to both my hon. Friends questions is yes. Ensuring that there is adequate sharing of information between the different criminal justice agencies and that each agency thinks across the piece is fundamental to ensuring that the kind of tragedy that has occurred in this case does not occur again.
T6.  Simon Hughes (North Southwark and Bermondsey) (LD): When will the Government come forward with their plans for a modern, fair, sympathetic and open coroners system for inquests, about which there has been so much concern; and have they accepted that secret inquests, or inquests without juries, are not a good idea?
Mr. Straw: As the hon. Gentleman will know, detailed proposals were published with a draft Bill in respect of a major reform of the coroners system, and we hope to bring that forward in the next Session.
Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. On 13 March, I received a written ministerial reply on the important issue of animal experiments. In the reply, the Minister referred to pygmy gorillas. I have conducted searches and spoken to zoologists throughout the world, and there is no such creature or species as a pygmy gorilla. I do not expect the Minister to be a zoologist, but I do expect accurate and up-to-date ministerial replies. I seek your guidance, Mr. Speaker.
Bob Spink (Castle Point) (UKIP): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I seek your advice. Column 111 of yesterdays Official Report shows the deeply respected right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) complimenting my work in the House, and inadvertently mentioning that I was expelled from the Conservative party. As those on the Tory Front Bench know very well, and as the letters, e-mail exchanges and record show, I resigned from the Conservative party. A day later, the Tory Whip was withdrawn. How can I ensure that the record is corrected? We have enough spin in this place.
The Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor (Mr. Jack Straw): Further to the point of order raised by the hon. Member for The Wrekin (Mark Pritchard), may I say that the new Ministry of Justice is responsible for many things, but not for pygmy gorillas, whether they exist or not? The matter is the responsibility of the Home Office, but I am happy to pass on the message.
Norman Baker (Lewes) (LD): On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Department for Transport written answers relating to Network Rail tell the Member who asked the question to write to Network Rail. As a consequence, the answer subsequently provided does not appear in official records, whereas other external bodies provide answers through Ministers, which are therefore recorded officially. Will you, Mr. Speaker, take the matter up with the Department for Transport to ensure that the record is available to all, not simply to the Member who asked the question?
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|